On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 04:04:22PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> As a practical matter, what if the Debian gcc team decide to release
> etch with gcc 3.3 because 3.4 break ABI on some platforms and gcc-4.x is
> not stable enough on all the platforms ? Will LCC follow ? If not, how
> are we going to share binary package if we do not use the same compiler?
Another question that bothered me, is whether "special" binaries which
cannot be bit-equal be rebuilt by the build-process (i.e. everything
containing timestamps, random offsets (consider prelink -R) or machine
dependant strings (like the hostname)) are really free. Obviously there
are rights attached to the binary which cannot be reproduced solely
from the delivered source.
A similar argument was brought up in the DRM/Palladium discussion with
signed binaries. But that was worse, because this kind of binaries was
unusable without the signature while non-LCC binaries would just be
that: non-LCC binaries.
Regards, David
--
* Customer: "My palmtop won't turn on."
* Tech Support: "Did the battery run out, maybe?"
* Customer: "No, it doesn't use batteries. It's Windows powered."
-- http://www.rinkworks.com/stupid/cs_power.shtml
